Concurrent Engineering Approaches within Product Development Processes for Managing Production Start-up phase

(1)

1

18

Concurrent Engineering Approaches within Product

Development Processes for Managing Production

Start-up phase

Sajjad Ebrahimi M.

THESIS WORK 2011

Production Systems: Production Development and

Management

(2)

Postal Address: Visiting Address: Telephone:

Box 1026 Gjuterigatan 5 036-10 10 00

551 11 Jönköping

Concurrent Engineering Approaches within Product

Development Processes for Managing Production

Start-up Phase

Sajjad Ebrahimi M.

This thesis work is performed at School of Engineering within the subject area of Production System: Production Development and Management. The work is part of the university’s two-year master degree. The authors are responsible for the given opinions, conclusions and results.

Supervisor: Glenn Johansson

Credit points: 30 ECTS (D-level) Date: 2011 – 12-09

(3)

3

Summary

Nowadays in a turbulent market, developing and launching a new product is one of most competitive strategies implemented by many large and small enterprises. In fact, launching a new product depends upon the performance of four critical functions: design, manufacturing, distribution and marketing. Their performances would increase or decrease the total time-to-market and consequently time-to-money. Time-to-market would be improved if the manufacturing system can diminish time-to-volume/quality/cost during production start-up phase. In order to overcome the impediment during a start-up phase, the significant parameters which are influencing a production start-up phase should be identified and managed. Hence, a system-wide approach would facilitate a product realization process so as to achieve global optimization throughout the entire process. One of such systems is Concurrent Engineering which can be applied owing to being enable to choose the best practice to improve product introduction process, being capable to improve cross functional integration and communication, and being empowered to apply a set of comprehensive methods for design analysis so that designers can select the most optimal design solution which is not only considering the design constraints, but also taking the constraints of production system, logistics and distribution into account. Hence, it can cover majority of problems in start-up phase which are generated due to lack of empathy between design and manufacturing.

This research studied the significant parameters influencing a production start-up phase. Then, it investigated whether the principle of concurrent engineering would support an efficient start-up phase. The selected research methodology is based on a conceptual and supportive literature review of the current scholars. The research design is according to a three-step process which is applied to catch most relevant literatures. The research implements an analogy reasoning logic to establish the outcome of the research through the comparison between principles of a concurrent engineering program and significant parameters. As a result of the research, the significant parameters are identified, in addition, a managerial framework is structured that can present the requirements to manage an efficient start-up phase. Moreover, the results indicate how a concurrent engineering program would support a start-up phase.

Key Words

Start-up phase, Concurrent Engineering, Concurrent Engineering Principles, Start-up Management

(4)

4

1 Introduction

1.1 Background and Problem Definition

Nowadays in a turbulent market, developing and launching a new product into the market is one of competitive strategies considered by many large and small enterprises. This strategy enables a company to earn larger market penetration than competitors; consequently, achieving a shorter time-to-money period and increasing the rate-of-return. Establishing this strategy demands that all functions within a supply chain – such as marketing, design, procurement, manufacturing, and distribution – to perform as a unique body of a system. “The economic success of most firms depend on their ability to identify the needs of customers and quickly create products that meet these needs and can be produced at low cost. Achieving these goals is not solely a marketing problem; it is a product development problem involving all of these functions” (Ulrich and Eppinger, 2008, p.2). Product development and Production development are two important processes, which are playing critical role in achieving this competitive capability.

Whereas the center of gravity is in design engineering function (Wheelwright, 1985), meaning that a design must satisfy various and dynamic customer requirements; the competence of manufacturing must be able to produce designed product rapidly. Product realization process involves both product development and production development processes as two integrated and dependent processes for achievement of efficient development and realization process (Bellgran and Säfsten, 2009).Thereupon, it is essential to manage product realization process, form concept development to manufacturing of the commercial product, efficiently and effectively. The ultimate purpose of the company is achieving high degree of quality in the shortest time and with as lowest cost as possible. Hence, a central area is the collaboration between product developers (i.e. designers) and production developers (i.e. production engineers) in order to generate the fitness between product design and manufacturing competence.

There are three sorts of interfaces throughout a product realization process; the first interface is between applied research and product development where a new technology can be introduced as a new design solution, and the second interface is between product development and production development where a new designed product must be produced by current or new manufacturing system. The third interface is between production development and marketing where the manufactured product must be distributed within a market in a way that attain customer attention and market penetration.

The more fitness between two parties of these interfaces, the shorter product development time as well as time-to-market and manufacturability problems will be, and the earlier product launching, consequently, the greater rate of return will be (Ulrich et al. 1993). The integration between design and production is an essential factor in reducing time-to-market (Pawar and Riedel, 1994).

(7)

7

The extent of fitness between product development (design) and production development (manufacturing) generates through production start-up process, where product design is signed off and manufacturing trial stages start. And gradually, the production rate increases going towards target quality and quantity. This phase is called “start-up” in which the major portions of learning and problem solving are carried out (Bellgran and Säfsten, 2009). The workforces learn new work methods as well as using new technology. The operational problems of machines and equipments are revealed when they should accommodate new metrics and values of a new developed product.

There are few researches concerning the approaches for managing the production start up. First sets of researches are explaining how start-up phase can be planned and integrated within a normal production planning. For example, (Clark and Fujimoto, 1991), (Wheelwright and Clark, 1992) and (Terwiesch and Xu, 2004) have explained the operational concepts during production start-up phase. Ulrich and Krishnan (2001) have pointed out that poor product-design decisions can slow the rate of production start-up. (Johanson and Karlsson, 1998), (Almgren, 1999a), and (Berg and Säfesten, 2006) have studied the critical operational and managerial factors which are affecting the performance of production system during start-up phase. Other sets of researches have tried to establish a framework for managing production ramp-up phase. The frameworks, in fact, constitute of different elements, which are influencing a ramp-up phase. For example, (Merwe, 2004) has introduced a framework for ramp-up compromising of three dimensions by which the body of production ramp-up management is forming. These three dimensions are novelty, learning, and ramp-up performance. A conceptual holistic ramp-up approach introduced by (Schuh et al, 2005) has made up of three thematic dimensions: ramp-up strategy, ramp-up planning, and ramp-up evaluation. (Berg and Säfesten, 2006) has pointed out that critical factors affecting ramp-up performance as well as the production ramp-up complexity must be considered when managing a ramp-up phase.

Most of the mentioned researches consent that the empathy and integration between design and manufacturing would help to avoid the problem during a start-up phase or generate a solution to resolve the problem in a resourceful way. There are various approaches by which the integration can be created throughout a product development process. For instance, Concurrent Engineering (CE), System Engineering (SE), Design for X abilities (DFX), and Product Life Cycle Management (PLCM) are considering the entire development process in a systematic and structured way.

Concurrent Engineering is “a widely recognized approach to improve product introduction” (Brookes and Backhouse, 1998, p. 3035). The research presents a result of a case study comprised of nine companies in UK that have been implementing concurrent engineering approach in their product development processes. Swink, (1998) indicates that there are two basic managerial initiatives for implementing a concurrent engineering program. First one is improving cross-functional integration and communication. The latter is improving methods for design analysis and decision making so that designers can cultivate a design excellence. CE approach is a philosophy that would be beneficial for an enterprise via focusing on customer demands, allowing a right first time philosophy to be practice, and shortening time

(8)

8

for introducing a product to market (Ainscough and Yazdani, 2000). Therefore, the reason for selecting CE is (1) to use a specific approach which is famous in the field of product introduction improvement, (2) CE can improve cross functional integration and communication, hence, it can cover majority of problems in start-up phase which are generated due to lack of empathy between design and manufacturing, (3) CE employ a set of comprehensive methods for design analysis so that designers can select the most optimal design solution which is not only considering the design constraints, but also taking the constraints of production system, logistics and distribution into account.

During last two decades, Concurrent Engineering (CE), a.k.a. Simultaneous Engineering (SE), has radically changed the ways by which new products are developed. Most of the researchers e.g. (Prasad, 1996), (Swink, 1998), (Foster, 2001) have found that CE can improve product design while lowering development time and cost. CE is the simultaneous performance of product design and process design (Foster, 2001). Concurrent Engineering is comprised of three basic principles: early involvement of participants, the cross-functional team approach, and the simultaneous work on different phases of product development (Swink, 1998), (Koufteros et al, 2001) and (Foster, 2001). Nowadays CE has divers applications and the core concepts that defines CE is becoming more vague, but following definition is the most common referred definition: “Concurrent Engineering is a systematic approach to the integrated, concurrent design of product and their related processes, including manufacturing and support. This approach is intended to cause the developers, from the outset, to consider all elements of the product life cycle from conception through disposal, including quality, cost, schedule, and user requirements” (Winner et al, 1988; modified from (Prasad, 1996)). CE is paralleling life cycle functions and tries to implement simultaneous design of all downstream processes during upstream phases of product development. Hence, critical downstream phases such as production start-up would be manageable via implementing a set of principles, instructions, and tools, which are the core competence of the CE approach.

Even though mentioned researches are considering parameters and factors which must be considered in start-up management and presenting frameworks for managing start-up phase, each of them encompasses partial discussions; that is, the parameters that can ensure an efficient start-up is dispersed among different literatures. In addition, some of the researches are discussing the overall situation during a start-up phase, rather than being analytical and identifying the root cause of problem. Hence, there is a need for a comprehensive framework in which various effective parameters in managing a start-up phase are included. Moreover, all of the reviewed literatures concur that the empathy of design and manufacturing activities is the decisive and supreme approach to overcome the problem during start-up phase; however, there is a lack of theoretical or practical approaches to explain if the efficient production start-up can be arranged by means of the frame of CE approaches.

(9)

9

1.2 Purpose

In order to accomplish a successful production start up and get along a smooth production start-up a two-stage mindset can be developed, first the significant factors and elements in managing a production start-up phase should be determined. And then, a structured approach and methodology, or a managerial framework would be established, based on the CE approaches. This mindset can bring about a proper perspective within a product realization process to get along with a production start-up phase. The perspective can help managers to identify potential risk parameters related to the integration point of product development and production development processes. Owning to the mentioned mindset the purpose of this research is:

- To identify and structure significant parameters that affect production start-up performance

- To analyze which principles of Concurrent Engineering and how can support an efficient production start-up

1.3 Delimits and Scopes

The scope of analysis begins when a product design signs off and it is ready to start a pilot run. And, it continues unless the primitive production targets are achievable. Therefore, 1) it is assumed that a technology is achieved the degree of maturity enabling it to use in production start-up process, thereby the technology development effects on product development process as well as production start up are not considered, but selecting the proper technology is. This assumption makes it possible to discuss that the manufacturing must achieve required competency when a tailored technology is available; thereupon, the lack of manufacturing competency cannot be blamed due to immature level of implemented technology.

2) Assuming a product is about to launch at a right market at the right time; therefore, the distribution requirements and marketing dynamic attitudes are not comprised in this research. Nevertheless, identifying customer needs and establishing corresponded product concept is involved through discussion.

Hence, this thesis makes no specific attempts to consider any functional areas other than design and manufacturing. Other functional areas, such as marketing, require an in-depth treatment of additional investigations.

The term ‘new product’, as used in this paper may refer either to a brand-new product coming from a radical innovative procedure or to an incremental improvement of an existing product. The focus of this thesis is on a breath of Concurrent Engineering tools and not on a depth of the tools presented in the report.

(10)

10

1.4 Outlines

The first chapter of the thesis includes the problem definition and research questions. The thesis scope and considered delimits are also discussed in first chapter. The second chapter deals with the methodological framework of the thesis. The research design, statistical data of reviewed literature as well as the logic of data analyzing and the logic of reasoning is presented in this chapter. Chapter 3 and 4 include the theoretical exposition of reviewed literature. Chapter 3 is dedicated to the references which discuss the matters related to the production start-up phase. Chapter 4 compiles the discussions related to the principle of a Concurrent Engineering approach. Chapter 5 entails the analysis of gathered data and answering the research questions. Finally, a brief conclusion and discussion of the thesis is provided in Chapter 6, wherein, the interpretation of the result is discussed.

(11)

11

2 Methodology

2.1 Scientific Research Approach

A scientific research is defined as “the systematic process of collecting and analyzing information (data) in order to increase our understanding of the phenomenon about which we are concerned or interested” (Leedy and Ormrond, 2001, p.10); therefore, the purpose of research can be either improvement of current practice (problem solving), anticipating the likelihood of particular events (forecasting and simulation), explaining why or how (analysis), looking for novel pattern (exploration), or compiling existing facts among various resources and making logical relationship across them (description).

According to (Williamson, 2002), there are different ways for categorizing a research; the categorizing can be done in terms of applied reasoning style (i.e. deductive or inductive), implemented research method (i.e. survey, case study, action research, and etc.), a historical perspective of research (i.e. empirism or rationalism), and a form of collected data (i.e. qualitative or quantitative). Whatever the research type is, the search and review of literature is the basic part in formulation of the theoretical framework, and to some extent, for building a ground theory. The literature search and review consists of identifying, locating, synthesizing, and analyzing the conceptual literature, as well as completed research reports, articles, conference papers, books, thesis, and other materials about the specific problem or problems of a research topic (Williamson, 2002).

A research base on literature review can entail the data in the form of words as well as numbers; however, the literature review would be considered as a qualitative research since the data is collected by means of qualification and context-specific description. A literature review can focus on research outcomes, research methods, theories, applications or all these. (Cooper, 1998) pointed out that a literature review can endeavor to integrate what others have done and said, to criticize previous scholar work, to build bridge between related topic areas, to identify central issues in a field.

(Huff, 2009) provided an extensive comparison of four distinct sorts of literature review. These four kinds of literature reviews are: survey, critical review, systematic review, and

supportive search. This classification is mainly based on the purpose, the source of

information, the search styles, written outputs, and criteria for closure.

Among these four kinds of literature review, supportive research is trying to resolve specific problems or support new ideas that occur as the research is carrying out. The information source belongs to the journals or books, which are relevant to the problem area. The search style is problem-driven search. According to Huff’s classification, this thesis is designed based on a conceptual and supportive review. In this research, as a master thesis, the foundation for the research is generated by reviewing and researching relevant references to the main topic, in order to investigate the different aspects of decisions through product development process.

(12)

12

2.2 Research Design

This thesis follows an extensive, systematic search within the academic peer-reviewed literature. The review also contains both empirical and non-empirical studies focusing mainly on the previous accomplished researches, which are related to the process, management, and project management rather than on engineering, technical and physical design. The essential bone of a research design would establish a breadth and width as well as efficient method to process literatures while, at the same time, capturing the important elements of the overall picture. In this way a comprehensive research can be established.

Based on (Machi and McEvoy, 2009) the scientific approach in literature review is divided into two different kinds; a basic literature review and an advanced literature review. The selected approach through this research report is corresponded to the latter one. [Figure 1] suggested literature review model is illustrated.

Concerning mentioned model for reviewing scientific literature, a systematic way of searching scientific databases is designed. [Figure 2] presents the building blocks of the systematic search methodology employed in this thesis. First stage involves searching the databases, finding different references and clustering information based on keywords and relevancy of the topic discussed in each reference. Stage two entails the full-text reading of relevant references which is followed by broad and in-depth information capturing; this process would, therefore, enable the researcher to analysis numerous concepts comprehensively. Moreover the reference chasing, by means of the reference list existing in each article, can help researcher to find other proper sources of information, which would not be discovered at the first stage. The last stage is a critical part of the research where various concepts should be synthesized in order to answer the research question appropriately.

Figure 1; the literature review model, modified from (Machi and McEvoy, 2009)

The literature review process Addresses Step 1. Select a topic Step 2. Search the literature Step 3. Developming the argument Step 4. Survey the

literature Step 5. Critique the literature Step 6. Write the review Organize and Forms Specifies and frames Explore and catalogs Documents and discovers Advocates and defines

(13)

13

Figure 2; The Research Design of the thesis

2.3 Data Collection

This study will focus on literature published between 1985 and 2010, with their citations being cross-checked to ensure that any earlier publications were also captured. Since there are numerous research works, either theoretically or empirically, of prior research related to production start-up, the archetype research works are solely cited.

The search strategy is developed at first by identifying the relevant data sources, the time frame of literatures, and keywords. Initially, a very broad selection of databases would be identified to cover a diverse range of publications (e.g. journal articles, conference

Database Seraching Information Clustring

Filtering based on Abstract Review Stage One Filtering based on Full-Text Reading Information Capturing Reference Chasing Literature Analysis Stage Two Synthesizing the concept Stage Three Developing Future Research

(14)

14

proceedings, theses, books). These databases included e-data sources such as EBSCO, Science Direct, Springer Link, Emerald, and Scopus (reference data base) along with the more traditional library cataloguing systems. Moreover, the references in items that had been found and bibliographies in books can be another appropriate way to use.

The Scopus citation database (http://www.scopus.com) was searched to identify the appropriate papers. It is a citation database that covers more than 15,000 journals in most subjects from 1996-. Scopus is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature and quality web sources with smart tools to track, analyze, and visualize a research. The citation-count criterion provided more high quality papers, while the random selection enabled us to include some of the recently published papers with low citations. According to the systematic procedure, mentioned in section 2.2 Research Design, initially reading the abstracts was the next step of the process in order to scan the irrelevant papers by employing academic judgment. The abstract-selected set of papers was then subjected to full-text reading during which information capturing, final screening, and classification of the papers were carried out. Information captured and extracted from full-text reading was fed into a template form for further use and analysis. Reference chasing was also performed whilst reading the full-text, and the relevant references were added to the list of papers to be analyzed.

Following list of Keywords is applied for searching through databases and journals. Many of these key words were combined with “interface”, “interaction” or “integration” as well as the search operators such as “AND”, and “OR” in order to ensure their relevance to this study. This set was then expanded and refined as appropriate articles were discovered. List of applied key words for searching through databases and journals are as following:

Product Realization Product Development Process Development Design for Manufacturing Production Ramp-up Production Start-up Manufacturing Stat-up Process Planning

Design and Manufacturing Interfaces Design and Manufacturing Integration Concurrent Engineering

Concurrent Engineering Methodology Concurrent Engineering Tools

(15)

15

2.3.1 Statistics of Literature Search Process

Following table, [Table 1], presents the statistics of the search result. The middle column presents the total number of found literatures in first stage of search where the information clustering and the abstract reviews has been done based on search keywords and relevancy of the topic discussed in each reference. The right column presents the total number of selected hits at the end of stage two whereat a full-text reading of relevant references followed by broad and in-depth information capturing would determine which one of literatures are most related to the subject of this thesis.

Reference/Journal/Book Total number of hit from literature search

Total number of selected hit at the end of stage two

Journal of product innovation Management 87 3

Journal of manufacturing technology management 65 3 International council on system engineering 1 1 International journal of production research 102 7

Harvard business review 20 1

Research policy 34 3

Business horizon 5 1

Sloan management review 10 3

Integrated manufacturing systems 45 7

International journal of product development 23 1 3rd international conference on reconfigurable

manufacturing systems

3 1

Journal of operation management 98 4

Harvard business school press 2 1

International journal of production economics 76 10 Robotics and computer integrated manufacturing 2 1

Management science 4 1

IEEE transaction on engineering management 10 2 International journal of operations and production

management

66 2

Research engineering design 27 2

Technovation 43 2

Journal of intelligent manufacturing 15 3

Annals of the CIRP 18 3

European journal of operational research 6 3

Concurrent Engineering: research and applications 91 6

Decision Science 1 1

International journal of product economics 13 1 International journal of advanced manufacturing

technology

7 4

Organization science 15 1

Journal of manufacturing systems 4 1

Concurrent Engineering 11 2

BOOK (McGraw Hill, The Free Press, PhD thesis/master thesis, paper in the book, conference paper etc)

33 24

Total 937 105

(16)

16

2.4 Logic of Data Analyzing and Logic of Reasoning

The form of data analysis in this thesis implements the analogy between the parameters affecting production start-up performance and the elements of concurrent engineering; this comparison would enable the researcher to analysis the data in a way that they can consider the significant parameters and find a tailored correspondent principle of concurrent engineering. The logic of reasoning would facilitate answering the research questions. The purpose of analogy reasoning is to study the root cause of effective parameters and then look for an appropriate element within the structure of concurrent engineering by which the negative impacts of parameters on production start-up can be managed. [Figure 3] illustrates the mindset of reasoning in the thesis.

Figure 3; the logic of data analyzing and reasoning

2.5 Validity and Reliability

(Golafshani, 2003) has compared the concept of reliability and validity from quantitative and qualitative research’s perspectives. She has noted that the reliability and validity of a research are conceptualized as trustworthiness, rigor and quality in qualitative paradigm. [Table 2] presents the common criteria of a classification for trustworthiness.

Reviewing the literature /Production Ramp-up

Effective parameters

Reviewing the literature/ Concurrent Engineering Principles of Concurrent Engineering Analogy Reasoning Answer the first

resarch question

Answer the second research question

(17)

17

Criteria Qualitative research Quantitative research

Truth value Credibility Internal validity

Applicability Transferability External validity

Consistency Dependability Reliability

Neutrality Conformability Objectivity

Table 2; Lincoln and Guba's Criteria for Trustworthiness [Source: adopted from Huff, S., A., (2009), based on “Comparison of qualitative and quantitative research in Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E., (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Saga Publication]

The validity of a research is investigated in two dimensions: internal and external. Internal validity evaluates the credibility of a research study meaning to what extent a measurement instrument is measuring what it is designed to measure. External validity evaluates the possibilities of generalization and transferability of the result meaning that whether the result of one study is valid in another similar situation. Reliability gages the consistency of the research meaning whether a study can be repeated with the same result.

In this thesis, the researcher tries to search broad and comprehend databases in order to establish credible source of information. Thereby, the articles are sought through five massive and voluminous databases. In addition, when writing the outputs the researcher does criticize, compare, or cite directly rather than interpret and manipulate without supporting source. When clustering the information and chasing the references, the researcher attempts to involve the most relevant resources, either as a book or article, to keep logical and dependable chain of information in order to facilitate reading and understanding flow for readers. In summary, the trustworthiness and authority of the research across the thesis can be considered in three areas: Searching the resource of information, Reading and clustering the information, and Writing the outputs. [Table 3] summarizes the effort of this thesis to institute the acceptable degree of trustworthiness and authority.

Considered Area How to become trustworthiness

Searching the resource of information Search broad and comprehend databases Reading and clustering the information Attempts to involve the most relevant

resources, either as a book or article, to keep logical and dependable chain of information Writing the outputs Not interpreting the body of knowledge

without providing proper support by former research

(18)

18

3 Theoretical Exposition; Part One

Even though the main focus of this thesis is on the start-up phase, a brief preface of product development process would help a reader to realize the start-up phase position and its significance.

3.1 Preface to start-up phase

3.1.1 Production Realization

The pipeline, at which an attractive product is designed for the customer, manufactured and then dispersed into the market, is called Product Realization Process. It refers to a broader concept starting from the process from product planning to the marketing of a complete product, besides it is defined as a systematic process that the identification and formulation of customer needs are an input of this process, while realization of customer needs is the output. Moreover, product development and production development are essential sub-processes within a product realization process. The entire process is supported by the cooperation of suppliers, consultants, and other supportive functions. (Bellgran and Säfsten, 2009)

Through product realization process, as product design has signed off, prototypes and early pilot products have been built and tested, and manufacturing tools and equipments have been installed, the main remaining objective is to bring product and production system together.

Figure 4; Product Realization Process

[Figure 4] is illustrating a product realization process as well as three critical milestones, which would determine the productivity of a product realization process. It is starting with the product concept development and product planning whereas the maturity of an employed technology would be a critical parameter for establishing a fruitful product development process. The second critical milestone is bringing about when the result of tests are expressing that the required product specification and attitudes are fulfilled, and that it is time to produce a developed product; this is the production start-up phase where the fitness between designed attitudes and the competency manufacturing system will be put through its paces. The last critical milestone but not the least is to distribute a finished product into the market. In this point, it is so significant to evaluate the fitness between the employed manufacturing strategy, the distribution resource and requirements planning because an appropriate logistical approach, such as postponement strategy, can decrease the complexity of upstream processes.

Manufacturing Planning and Control Applied Science Prodduct Concept Development Design; Test and Refinement

Manufacturing Distribution Marketing

Production Realization Process (New) Product Design

and Development Distribution Resource/Requirements Planning Discovering and maturing new technology Sale; Service

(19)

19

3.1.2 Product Design and Development Process

A product development (PD) is a transformation of customers needs/desires or a market opportunities into what can be sold in available markets for a logical price and reasonable production cost; “the set of activities beginning with the perception of the market opportunity and ending in the production, sale, and delivery of the product” (Ulrich and Eppinger, 2008, p.2). A product development process (PDP) “is a sequence of steps or activities which an enterprise employs to conceive, design, and commercialize a product” (Ulrich and Eppinger, 2008, p.12).

Many of steps within a PDP are intellectual and organizational rather than physical. The conclusion of the product development process is the product launch meaning; when a product becomes available for distribution and procurement in a marketplace (Ulrich and Eppinger, 2008, p.13).

There are two types of product development process – stage-gate and spiral processes. Each one of them constitutes the generic product development phases, but they differ in the arrangement of the sequence of phases. The stage-gate product development process is comprised of distinct stages or phases as well as a review or gate at the end of the each phase in order to evaluate whether the previous phase is successfully completed. If the review fulfills the requested conditions the project proceeds to the next phase, otherwise the project will iterate through former phase. Sometimes this iteration can be difficult and costly (Unger and Eppinger, 2009). The spiral product development process includes several planned iterations that span various phases of product development process. It is mainly implemented by software industry (Unger and Eppinger, 2009).

3.1.2.1 A Generic Product Development Process

The generic product development process consists of six phases which based on their chronological sequence are as following: planning, concept development, system-level design, detail design, testing and refinement, and production ramp-up.

Planning; this phase includes three overall dimensions. The basic approach to markets and products with respect to the competitor’s activities should be determined. This approach is called corporative strategy. Hence the assessment of technology development and the evaluation of market objectives should be accomplished in this phase. The output of this phase is named as mission statement (Ulrich and Eppinger, 2008).

Concept Development: “A concept is a description of the form, function, and features of the product which are accompanied by a set of specification, an analysis of competitive products, and justification of project” (Ulrich and Eppinger, 2008, p. 15). This phase needs more coordination among different functions. (Ulrich and Eppinger, 2008)

System-level Design: this phase pertains a definition of the product architecture and the decomposition of the product into subsystems. The architecture is usually presented as a geometric layout. The final assembly scheme for production system and a preliminary process flow diagram for the final assembly process are other outputs of system-level design phase. (Ulrich and Eppinger, 2008)

(20)

20

Detailed Design: Two important issues are addressed in this phase; the production cost and the robust performance of product/process design. In addition, the complete specification of geometric value, materials metrics, and tolerances of all of the unique parts in the products as well as the identification of the all of the parts that should be provided by supplier are determined. The outputs of this phase are process plan for fabrication and assembly, tooling design, control documentation for the product. (Ulrich and Eppinger, 2008)

Testing and Refinement: in this phase, multiple preproduction prototypes are constructed and evaluated. The various types of prototypes constructed through different phases of product development process. There are different kinds of prototypes to identify: whether the product satisfies the customer needs, whether it is working as designed, as well as to test product’s reliability and performance in order to figure out necessary engineering changes. (Ulrich and Eppinger, 2008)

Production ramp-up: in the production ramp-up phase intended production system will be implemented in order to train workforces and identify any remaining flaws and the solution to resolve the problems (Ulrich and Eppinger, 2008).

3.2 Production Start-up phase

3.2.1 Terminologies and Definitions

Within different literatures related to production start-up discussions, there are a few terminologies, which are not clearly defined, thereafter; different terminologies are used for same circumstances. [Figure 5] presents the anatomy of production start-up phase and applied terminologies for various sub-phases.

Figure 5; Production Start up & the changing the rate of production

The horizontal axis represents Time parameters in the figure. At the left hand of figure, the product design is approaching towards production start-up phase; it is referred as Industrialization period, a. k. a Product Introduction, and Method Planning. Industrialization

Product Design Industrialisation Continuous/Seri Production Production rate Time Pilot run/Pre-production Production Start up Primitive production target Legends: Production Ramp-up Product design

signing off Start of Production _(SOP)

Manufacturing Problems

(21)

21

is defined as the engineering design to production that is compromised of activities by which a product can become producible. (Bellgran and Säfsten, 2009)

Product design signing off is a point when the engineering design process ends and the manufacturing process can be started. It is important to mention that design singing off differs from design frozen point. Design frozen point can be later than design singing off point through production start-up process.

At a specific point in the development process, the design team must stabilize or freeze the product’s specifications, design principals, components and material choices. Design freeze can be implemented for specific parts of design. There are always engineering changes during production start-up phase. (Langowitz, 1989)

Production Start-up process encompasses activities by which an appropriate production process can be realized until the execution of production process (Bellgran and Säfsten, 2009). After designing, building, testing and refining prototypes, the next phase brings everything together at tailored production system. This phase is called production start up and will be continued till reaching anticipated production rate. Start up phase is constituted of two steps; pilot run and production start-up. (Clark and Fujimoto, 1991)

Pilot run, a. k. a. Pre-production phase is “a full-scale rehearsal of the commercial production system including parts, tools, dies, jigs and fixtures, and assemblies”. (Clark and Fujimoto, 1991, p.188)

Pilot run which uses volume production lines is often called pre-production, while generally pilot run is refered only to the trials using separate pilot lines (Clark and Fujimoto, 1991) This phase involves producing prototypes, which are not intended to send to customer. These prototypes will be used to discover the problems in production processes (Bellgran and Säfsten, 2009). Over the pilot run step the process is completely engineered. (Clark and Fujimoto, 1991)

The objective of pilot run is “to produce pilot products for testing, training (learning), and problem solving” (Almgren, 1999a, p.155).

During pilot production, pilot vehicles are built and assessed from a product and production system perspective. Training is an important activity during pilot production. The objective of pilot production is to identify and prevent disturbances affecting final verification performance before the start of volume production. Almgren H., (2000)

Start of Production (SOP) is the commercial start of production. In the other word, it is the point in time when the products are produced for the actual market (Johanson and Karlsson, 1998).

Production Start-up, a. k. a. Manufacturing Start-up: Once pilot production has ended and the requirements for the start of production have been approved, manufacturing start-up begins (Almgren, 1999a and 2000). Different terminologies have been used among literatures

(22)

22

to address this phase; production ramp-up used by (Clawson 1985), (Clark and Fujimoto, 1991), (Terwiesch and Bohn, 2001), (Terwiesch and Xu, 2004), (Juerging and Milling, 2006), (Bellgran and Säfsten, 2009), manufacturing start-up used by (Wheelwright, 1985), (Terwiesch et al, 1999), (Almgren, 1999a), and debugging phase used by (Terwiesch et al 1999), are the most common applied terminologies.

Production ramp-up is the period between completion of development and full capacity utilization. (Terwiesch and Bohn, 2001),

Production Ramp-up is the successive increase of the production rate, up to the point that primitive planned targets in terms of production volume, yield and quality, are reached. During production ramp-up phase, finished products can be delivered to the customer. (Almgren, 1999a), (Bellgran and Säfsten, 2009) and (Fjällström et al, 2009)

In order to measure time-to-volume, definition of two kinds of measures is needed: quality yield and quantity yield. The yield is defined as how well the company fulfils its goals regarding time-to-quantity and time-to-quality (Johanson F., Karlsson M., 1998).

It is also pointed out by (Juerging and Milling, 2006), that the production ramp-up is a time span, which is equal to the differences between time-to-market and time-to-volume.

Production ramp-up is also defined as the period of time following the introduction of a new process into a production facility. The main objective is scaling up production output from the small batches used in prototyping to the large volumes demanded by a market. (Terwiesch and Xu, 2004)

Clark and Fujimoto (1991) have reported “Japanese automotive industries are enable to run both pilot production and commercial production simultaneously at the same time, at the same place” (Clark and Fujimoto, 1991, p.191). In their study of the global automotive industry they have observed significant regional differences in ramp-up performance in Japanese companies versus US and European companies. Their data shows that the time to full-scale production varied from one to six months, while time to normal quality can range between one month and a year. For both measures, on average, Japanese companies ramped-up faster than their American counterparts.

Contiguous (Seri) Production is referred to producing a product in the targeted volume in order to saturate the market. “Time to full-scale production varies from one to six month” (Clark and Fujimoto, 1991, p.192)

In [Figure 5], two kinds of dashed lines are expressing the situation of production rate and manufacturing problems. As the manufacturing problems are removed, a production ramp-up phase progresses forward and gets close to primitive production targets.

3.2.2 Managing Production Start-up Phase

In this section, the articles related to production start-up phase are reviewed. The ultimate purpose is to recognize the significant parameters for managing a production start-up phase, and to study the previous researches that have established a certain approach in managing

(23)

23

production up. The effective parameters involve variables by which the production start-up performance is boosted and the ones which hindrance the pre-planned norm of functions. The performance of different functions, e.g. quality control, engineering validation, production planning, and etc which, are involved in product and process development procedure, will affect the functionality of a start-up phase. The disturbance variables are the causes and effects of any inconvenience and unplanned event, which reduce the productivity during production start-up. The disturbance variables can occur due to internal or external reasons. The internal reasons can be under control since their causes belong to inner processes. The external variables impose by exterior reasons, which their changes cannot be controlled by the power of organization such as market demand. These variables are, for instance, affecting the quality performance, machines/equipments/tooling functionalities, work methods, human resource efficiency and etc.

A few numbers of scholars, e. g. (Langowitz, 1988), (Merwe, 2004), (Schuh et al, 2005), Berg and Säfsten (2006), have tried to form a framework to explain the cause of effective parameters while some of them, e. g. (Clawson, 1985), (Langowitz, 1989), (Almgren, 1999a), have enumerated a list of variables affecting production start-up performances. Considering both types of researches, in this thesis, the effective parameters are categorized into following managerial scopes:

1- Empathy from Design to Process planning and to Manufacturing 2- Interdepartmental Interface Management

3- Project Architecture 4- Project Management

5- Human Resource Management 6- Supply Chain Management

7- Information Management and learning organization 8- Product Development Organization

9- Ramp-up strategy & Ramp-up planning

10- Manufacturing system capability in process planning and process responsiveness 11- Complexity of product and production systems

12- Late Engineering Changes

3.2.2.1 Empathy from design to process planning and to manufacturing

The decisions of product design result in determining the geometric models of assemblies and components, a bill of material, and control documentation of production. The detailed design is also addressing the interactions between product design and production process. The decision involved in this area will answer the question such as what the values of key design parameters are, what the configuration of the components and assembly precedence relations is, and what the design of components are, including material and process selection. (Krishnan and Ulrich 2001)

One of the most significant parameters in production start-up performance is associated with establishing a manufacturing system so it can satisfy the demands of a new designed product. In other words, there should be empathy within three critical sections of product development

(24)

24

processes: product design, process planning and manufacturing process. The empathy can be defined in terms of software and hardware fields. The software fields involve such cogitating schemes as strategy alignment between design and manufacturing, organizational structure, project management, and etc; while, the hardware oriented fields concerns technological ability and facility resources. (Langowitz, 1988), (Vandevelde and Dierdonck, 2003), (Gindy et al, 1999), (Wheelwright, 1985)

The research by (Langowitz, 1988) has taken this argument into account that “Problems occurring in manufacturing due to a mismatch between the new product’s demands and the factory’s manufacturing capability can only be avoided by managing the potential for mismatch” (Langowitz, 1988, p. 46). Thereafter, a conceptual framework is presented by which the implementation of new product development and manufacturing is focused at the project level. [Figure 6] illustrates a graphical summarized of the framework.

Figure 6; the conceptual frameworks of a new product’s initial commercial manufacturing (modified from (Langowitz, 1988))

The framework points out the mismatches between the manufacturing capability and the development process of a new product project. The manufacturing capability involves two sources: physical resources capability and organizational capability. These two sources are linked to each other by means of production process flow and production planning systems. Physical resource capability can be considered as means of fabricating a new product and movement of the new product within the factory. The organizational capability can mean an organization’s ability in monitoring an activity, identifying issues that are in need of an alternative, evaluating the situation and responding to issues. As a basic condition, the manufacturing capability and the development process of a new product project should not only be in harmony with each other, but also must priorities the strategies of the new product

New Product Project

Development process Manufacturing Capability

Physical Resource Capability:

1) Fabricating new product 2) Movement of the new product through the processes in the factory

Organizational Capability:

The situational respond system of the factory

Linkages:

Production Process Flow Work Scheduling System

1) Coordination Definition, Ownership 2) Ambitiousness of goals 3) Perceived priority

of project _{Product Design:} 1) Product Technology 2) Process Technology

Initial New Product Manufacturing

Mistmach:

1) Non-disruptive Solution 2) Problem

(25)

25

project. The mismatch occurs when the requirements of a new product, cannot be accommodated by the factory’s current manufacturing capability. The situational response system can either enable the organization to resolve the mismatch, or may not be able to adequately fulfil the requirements of a new product. In the first circumstance, there will be no substantial disruption of a new product or current manufacturing system whereas the latter circumstance will bring about a substantial disruption for both parties. (Langowitz, 1988) However, the question is how the problem can be avoided? As an answer for this question; there are two possibilities. “First, the new product may be designed to match the factory’s existing competence. Second, the factory may prepare in advance of the new product’s manufacture for mismatches which are expected, based on the requirements of the new product’s design” (Langowitz, 1988, p. 46). (Langowitz, 1989) has argued that management during a new product development process is a critical factor of success, and one of the vital areas to manage is the fit between product design and corresponded manufacturing process, referred to as “factory fit”. Moreover one determining factor for the manufacturers for being flexible and reconfigurable in order to respond to volatile market, is to be capable of introducing the new product across a new or existing production system successfully at the shortest possible time window. The level of fitness (i.e. the extent of mismatches) between product development process and manufacturing capability varies considering discussed conceptual framework.

The optimal fitness between design specification and manufacturing competence would occur when a new designed product can be tailored to the existing manufacturing system. The manufacturability evaluation of a design at the early stage of product design can assess the design-manufacturing interfaces so that an appropriate interface management can be established between design and manufacturing Vandevelde and Dierdonck (2003).

The essential tasks through a manufacturing system are to manage the flow of material effectively, to utilize the resources such as machines/equipment/people, and to satisfy the customer requirements by utilizing the capacity of the supplier as well as internal facilities (Vollmann et al, 2005). These tasks are planned and controlled by usage of a manufacturing planning and control system (MPC).The manufacturing planning and control systems must be able to not only respond to the customer needs in terms of proper delivery time and quality, but also to facilitate and maintain a process by which required attributes of a product can be fulfilled.

The production ramp-up phase is executed through a common manufacturing system in a company, hence, when planning a ramp-up, capability and attributes of manufacturing system should be considered. (Gindy et al, 1999) has pointed to the Process Planning as a critical bridge between design and manufacturing where design information should be translated into the manufacturing instructions and technical manufacturing functions. Manufacturing responsiveness is defined as “the ability of a manufacturing system to make a rapid and balanced response to the predictable and unpredictable changes” (Gindy et al, 1999, p. 2399).By improving manufacturing responsiveness, a factory’s reacting conditions against changes can become boosted.

(26)

26

Nowadays Process Planning is carried out through CAD-CAM integration; the computer integrated process planning (CAPP) is a software-oriented approach to generate the integration. Besides Process Planning, production planning is another manufacturing function through which the operations are scheduled and manufacturing resources are assigned to the operations indicated in process plan. (Gindy et al, 1999)

(Gindy et al, 1999) has argued that the process planning and production planning are usually performed sequentially; whereas, the integration of them can improve the manufacturing responsiveness in terms of setting and meeting due dates as well as responding to the internal and external disturbances such as machine breakdowns and market demand changes. (Gindy et al, 1999)

A production ramp-up phase is the frontline of manufacturing process wherein planned manufacturing processes must fulfil conditions to approach a high volume production, Hence, managers might think about coping with various internal and external disturbances that can happen during a normal manufacturing process. Throughout the review of other literature, the manufacturing disturbance factors will be discussed in this thesis. Thereafter, an effective parameter in production ramp-up performance is coordinated process planning and production planning. This coordination will bridge the gap between design and manufacturing.

The fitness between design specification and manufacturing system capabilities would be generated through two areas. Firstly, the design and management interfaces must be managed and controlled when the concept for a product design is created. For instance, Design-for-Manufacturing/Assembly (DFM/A) approaches are common tools for handling the interfaces between design and manufacturing in this area. (Almgren, 1999a)

3.2.2.2 Interdepartmental Interface Management

A manufacturing start-up program is the phase of interfaces between different functions such as engineering, procurement, quality, and production. Therefore, an effective interdepartmental management strategy would manage and control the activities according to the master plan of the start-up program. The better planning and scheduling of upstream activities, the more adequate time window for downstream activities such as production start-up will be. (Clawson, 1985)

The decisions made by managers would generally influence the overall procedure of development process (Schloz-R et al, 2007); hence, it is necessary to identify the decisions which are essential and significant for a start-up success. This discussion is also proved by (Juerging and Milling, 2006) via modeling the interdependencies of product development decisions the production start-up performances. Ulrich and Krishnan (2001) have pointed out that poor product-design decisions can slow the rate of production start-up. Clawson (1985) has remarked that the decisions coming from significant functions, such as purchasing, quality assurance, engineering, manufacturing, and suppliers are affecting the manufacturing start-up phase.

(27)

27

Ulrich and Krishnan (2001) divided decision areas into two groups; first decisions in setting up a development project will be reviewed, and then, decisions within a product development project. The decisions associated with setting up a product development project are a) product strategy and planning b) product development organization, c) project management. The decisions associated within a development projects are a) concept development, b) supply chain design, c) product design, d) performance testing and validation, e) product launch and production ramp-up. (Ulrich and Krishnan, 2001)

More integration between engineering design and manufacturing can facilitate managing interdepartmental interfaces within the most critical bottleneck of development process. Swink and Calanton, (2004) have described the integration as a degree by which interdependencies among product design specification and process design capabilities are recognized and solved. The integration of design engineering and manufacturing process knowledge does ensure that the product will be produced efficiently and without defect, thus improving product reliability. (Swink and Calanton, 2004)

The most important activities of a start-up phase consist of discovering and removing bugs between design and manufacturing processes, problems, and missed improvement opportunities that could have introduced earlier in the development. Thus well-established and executed product and process design phases will lead to easier ramp-ups. The way design and manufacturing are coordinated will affect the number of problems and missed opportunities for improvement. (Clawson 1985)

Vandevelde and Dierdonck (2003) have described the barriers across the design and manufacturing interfaces and argued that establishing stable integration between design and manufacturing can provide a smooth production start-up. [Figure 7] presents an integration model which discussed by Vandevelde and Dierdonck (2003). The model expresses the managerial actions by which a smooth production start-up can be ensured.

Figure 7; the "integration model", modified from (Vandevelde and Dierdonck (2003))

Clawson (1985) had explained critical issues that lead to operational risk of upper management decisions regarding the competence of real operational systems. A manufacturing start-up program has more ambiguous characteristics than a normal manufacturing process, which has been done for several times and all staff and different departments are used to handling the situation. Owning to this fact, managers should consider

A smooth introduction to production Project nature Formal Organization Design and Manufacturing Empathy

(28)

28

the reason for disturbances and going out of control within a manufacturing start-up program. A designer wants to create an elegant and perfect product whilst a manufacturing engineer is interested in simple producible products. Both of them should cooperate together in material selection and process planning. (Clawson, 1985)

3.2.2.3 Project Management

Project management is consisted of the project activity planning and project control. A project management is the heart of decision making during a development project. Hence, the decisions related to project management are controlling the performance of the entire project in every single phase. (Ulrich and Krishnan, 2001)

Wheelwright (1985) has addressed project management as the driving force for directing a development project. Ireland, (2006), has defined project management as a discipline of planning, organizing and controlling the activity of a project. In order to control, to measure and to evaluate the progress of pre-planned activities, a set of metrics should be implemented. For instance the activities related to product design and tool making should be overlapped. Otherwise, a problem creates when design is changed due to the effects on tool making process. Hence, the project needs more flexible management style (Clawson, 1985). Due to unpredictable circumstances within a start-up program, a well-defined plan must be flexible in different situations. Having not mature and well-established program from the beginning as well as evaluating improper performance criteria can lead to a huge project risk. The examples of immature program issues are: wrong estimation of the demands based on Bill-of-Material (BOM), wrong estimation of what is needed and when, not considering the effects of changes on the antecedence of parts and on the suppliers performance. Moreover, the examples of improper performance metrics can be: Having high rate of rejects due to inappropriate quality standards targets, and resource utilization purposes are incompatible with the actual demands. A well-defined schedule must consider monitoring and tracking the action throughout a critical path. It is suggested to have critical path and detailed scheduled program for each process. Normally tools should be available before stating the production and most of the tools and equipment should be modified based on the start-up program requirements. It must be considered that any change in design would lead to the changes in tooling. An effective product design can decrease the demands for new tooling. (Clawson, 1985)

Implementing unnecessary quality oriented constraints would generate unnecessary high reject rate. The production ramp-up target setting such as production rate and quality targets are more unrealistic since they are established at the early phases of product development phases supported by uncertain and approximate information. (Clawson 1985)

3.2.2.4 Human Resource Management

All factors concerning the mobilization and development of personnel as human resources are classifying as a human resource management. The personnel training, motivating approaches, reward and compensation systems should be established by human resource management. (Langowitz 1988) has argued that having good atmosphere of coordination and communication is influential on production start-up. To have good atmosphere of

(29)

29

coordination it is necessary to establish predefined roles and responsibilities across team members.

During a start-up program, it is more effective to employ the more experienced, hard-worker and more knowledgeable labors. The knowledgeable workers can learn and being adopted with changes much more easily and rapidly. (Clawson, 1985)

Almgren (1999a) has deliberated a workforce policy as an approaches based on which project tasks are assigned to labors. It is suggested that the skilled and dedicated workforces would concentrate on critical processes during manufacturing start-up. Also, work rotation must be abolished during full-speed testing of start-up phase. The policies should increase the work motivation; it is in turn proposed to affect task performance. (Almgren, 1999a)

3.2.2.5 Supply Chain Management

The supply chain defined as “inbound and outbound flow of materials, as well as the supply of intellectual property and services to the firm” (Krishnan and Ulrich, 2001, pp.8). Supply china design decisions include supplier selection and the issues associated with production and distribution system design such as the configuration of physical supply chain which is directly related to the product design.

The result of a survey, accomplished by Johanson and Karlsson, (1998), expressed that the supply of material, product design, and flow of material within manufacturing processes were the most important sources of the problem within a production ramp-up. The problems concerning the supply of material had mostly happened due to uncertain delivery times, while lack of flexibility in design and uncertain technical specifications had been generating the problems concerning product design.

Planning the material demand and controlling the material flow is one of essential steps in production planning. Implementing a common material requirements planning (MRP) system during a manufacturing start-up program can add cost and chaos to the system. A computerized system to control the inventory level would revise the material flow. Clawson (1985) has suggested implementing a secondary inventory control system for start-up. This secondary system is not separated from the main inventory control system, but controlling just start-up inventory (Clawson, 1985).

A supplier must be informed and understand the changes within start-up phase. In order to alleviate potential purchasing difficulties, the manager can give the procurement agency technical support, develop detailed process schedule for parts, and identify the products critical path. (Clawson, 1985)

The proper material supply can avoid losses generated due to the lack of quality specifications as well as the lack of on time delivery. Hence, the idle time would be reduced; consequently the net operating time of machines can be increased. (Almgren, 1999a)

3.2.2.6 Strategy Alignment within different functions

The conductive structure of organization would reduce the uncertainty in decision making; consequently, the alignment would be achieved among product development program and

(30)

30

other strategic management areas. The purpose is to institute an objective strategic management of such functions as Research and Development (R&D), pricing and marketing. The best approach is a more horizontal cut with less R&D in each new product development project and a better balance in the team from all functions. The R&D department should more focus on critical technology and inventions. (Wheelwright, 1985)

The comprehensive strategic thinking must govern the products requirements and factory learning and required skills, new product introduction, and managing the radical and incremental product development process. (Langowitz, 1988)

Within a start-up phase, the firm starts commercial production at a relatively low level of volume; as the organization develops confidence of the abilities of the organization (as well as the abilities of its suppliers) would consistently improve to execute production; moreover, the abilities of marketing can motivate more production by means of increasing the sell, capturing feedbacks from customer and interpreting them into production language, and forecasting the market demand , and consequently to increase the production volume. At the closure of the ramp-up phase, the production system has achieved its target levels of volume, cost, and quality. (Wheelwright and Clark 1992, p. 8)

It is discussed by (Wheelwright, 1985), (Langowitz, 1988) and (Berg and Säfsten, 2006) that there must be existent of the involvement of the objective strategic management not only within a product development process, but also within a production start-up management. The strategic alignment would encompass the strategies of the essential functions such as Research and Development (R&D), manufacturing strategy, pricing and marketing strategy. This alignment is not possible unless there created a strategic alignment among all resources and functions of enterprise organization.

The priority of projects portfolio is determining according to the product development strategy of the company. Johanson and Karlson (1998) have indicated that the priority of product development project as an affecting factor on production ramp-up performance since when the project is most prioritized, the companies are looking at the problems more seriously than less prioritized projects. Langowitz (1988) has pointed out that the smoothness of manufacturing increased as priority given to manufacturability increased.

[Figure 8] expresses the graphical presentation of discussed alignment between different strategies. Berg and Säfsten (2006) have argued the impact of manufacturing strategy directly on ramp-up performance. The suggested framework by Berg and Säfsten (2006), illustrated via [Figure 9], constitutes of three dimensions which are interfacing with overall manufacturing strategy of enterprises:

1- The changes needed in manufacturing strategy content 2- Critical factors affecting the production ramp up 3- Previous production ramp-up evaluation

Concurrent Engineering Approaches within Product Development Processes for Managing Production Start-up phase

18

Concurrent Engineering Approaches within Product

Development Processes for Managing Production

Start-up phase

Sajjad Ebrahimi M.

THESIS WORK 2011

Production Systems: Production Development and

Management

Concurrent Engineering Approaches within Product

Development Processes for Managing Production

Start-up Phase

Sajjad Ebrahimi M.

Summary

Key Words

Table of Contents

1 Introduction

1.1 Background and Problem Definition

1.2 Purpose

1.3 Delimits and Scopes

1.4 Outlines

2 Methodology

2.1 Scientific Research Approach

2.2 Research Design

2.3 Data Collection

2.4 Logic of Data Analyzing and Logic of Reasoning

2.5 Validity and Reliability

3 Theoretical Exposition; Part One

3.1 Preface to start-up phase

3.2 Production Start-up phase